The comrades who make up the critical sector of CCOO have voted against the Confederal Council of February 1, the agreement reached between the unions and the government on amendments to the pension system for the following reasons:
GENERAL 1. The modification of the pension is not a matter of "urgent need" from the moment that even with the calculations made by the usual doomsayers concerned, we recognize that our system as it is today would have no problem set to 2030 and enjoys a surplus, even in times of crisis like the present, of 64,000 million Euros. We therefore believe that the reform (which should be developed to improve the public pension system and never worse based on cuts) could be in the not marked by the burden of the crisis and pressure from speculators.
2. We have a pension spending 3 points below the EU average and will continue taking at least until 2030, when we are still one point below.
3. The economic crisis we are suffering has nothing to do with pensions and their future, but with a system Uncontrolled and predatory financial speculation linked to real estate. Instead of controlling these excesses, this reform will cause a shift of savings into private pension funds, fueling the same logic that caused the crisis and severe risk putting that same employee savings.
4. The reform is made to this urgency is, in the words of the Minister of Economy and the Prime Minister, to give "trusted" financial speculators (markets), but this does not mean that they stop speculating. The issue is clear, is acting on behalf, not citizenship, but of financial powers.
5. The projections in based those who want to reduce spending to sustain the system does not take into account either the future GDP growth or productivity. With modest growth in productivity will be many more resources than current pensions.
6. The funding of pensions, in the hypothetical case that may have deficits in the future, need not always be funded by fees on wages, can also be made progressive taxation on profits or PGE.
PARTICULAR ASPECTS OF AGREEMENT
Government-Trade Agreement contains measures they consider unbearable, especially the following:
Increase retirement age and demand for more years of contributions
• are increased three and a half years of contributions required to qualify for regular retirement at age 65, with 100% of the base (from 35 to 38.5 years) .
• It will take 37 years to retire at age 67 with 100% of the base, which means two more years of contributions and increase of two years of retirement age. •
disappears special retirement at age 64.
Increasing the minimum age for mandatory retirement for almost all of the people working at age 67 rights is a very important crop, with the social consequences of having to work until age physically often unaffordable, and it is easy to foresee a significant increase in temporary disability among future workers over 65 years compounded by the fact that the employer can fire at any time with the facilities given by the labor reform and generally apply to the person dismissed the reduction coefficients (7.5% each year you retire before the normal age, 67 years in most cases). To this is added the difficulty for these groups to continue working, as it shows that the employment rate of people aged 60 to 64 years is 32.1% compared to 66.5% of those aged 50 to 54.
Delaying the retirement age is also close the door two years to the millions of young people who are unemployed and those who are denied the opportunity to work.
Increasing the contribution period to 38.5 years is to put a ribbon unattainable for most workers, with trading volatile race, which will be significantly reduced pension, and also gets itself increased retirement age.
years are increased computed for the period of pension calculation.
He spends 15 years current 25 in a period of ten years, as is another cut for almost all workers, which will seriously impair their income on the current situation. CONCLUSIONS
whole philosophy and objective of the Agreement affect spending, but there is no clear and computable measures on income, with strength in the "contributory" and "sustainability" of the system rather than solidarity.
accepted a false idea of \u200b\u200bequity-to-provided services as preparing the ideological ground for funded schemes.
Young people and women entering the labor market in precarious situations, with low prices, intermittent or part-time employment, will be the biggest losers from this reform, condemning them to poverty pensions.
Delaying the retirement age from 65 to 67 years and the increase of the calculation up to 25 years, is, for most future retirees and retirees, a reduction of his pension (as in work and studies recognize the union itself .) For the government and powerful economic sectors, the agreement aims to produce a sharp cut in social rights and expectations of current and future pensions of millions of working people, to promote business plans and private pension funds.
reform will generate in the medium and long term a significant segmentation in the English society, in which the pension guaranteed by the Social Security system, which accesses the working population in general, be approximated increasingly non-contributory or assistance, which may encourage non-reporting of all income received. Very few people can access the highest levels of pension system and therefore is "inviting" you, who have high income and savings capacity, look for alternative, of course, systems of financial market capitalization. Logic absolutely wicked.
Finally, we appeal to military CCOO, defending their views, democracy and plurality, of this organization, which remains the union where hundreds of thousands of workers every day struggle for a better world. Critic Sector
CCOO
0 comments:
Post a Comment